A tale of two interviews
Peter Hoskin 11:15am
So, at the end of a hyperactive week in politics, we've got a pair of interviews with Brown and Cameron. The PM chats with the News of the World, while Cameron appeared on the Marr sofa earlier.
One general similarity between the two interviews stands out: neither is particularly confrontational. Rather than chiding Labour after Alistair Darling's admission yesterday, Cameron adopted a more conciliatory tone, saying things like: "If [the government] ... set out reductions that we think make sense we won’t play politics with it, we’ll say yes." And, for his part, Brown only nods towards the "big choice" to be made at this year's election, and doesn't mention the Tories once. Quite rare that, for Gordon.
After his New Year message, all this is to be expected from Cameron. The Tory leadership are keen to present themselves as statesmen above the fray of political tittle-tattle. But what about Brown? Dividing lines are his modus, so why doesn't he weave them here? Part of it will be because he's on the back foot after this week's attempted coup. But you wonder whether it's also because his Cabinet colleagues have succeeded in curbing his class war. Time, and the course of the election campaign, will tell.
As for the specifics, Brown rabbits on about "determination" and Nelson Mandela – but the most noteworthy part is this confirmation that Sarah Brown will feature heavily in Labour's campaign:
"Glamorous Sarah will be thrust into the election limelight after Labour chiefs identified her as the PM's greatest asset. She has redrawn her diary so she can be constantly at her husband's side during the hectic four-week run-in to polling day."While the take-home point from Cameron is probably that he wants to reduce net immigration to the "tens of thousands," rather than the hundreds of thousands.
Anyway, the first week of the long, long election campaign is over. It's been a topsy-turvy few days – but, on the evidence of this morning, Cameron has come out of it by far the stronger. CCHQ has Agents Hoon and Hewitt to thank for that.



Previous






Thomas Cussans
January 10th, 2010 11:55am Report this commentGlamorous Sarah? Glamorous?
You might as well call Margaret Beckett a sex-bomb or Jacquie Smith a siren.
She's about as glamorous as a mouldy potato.
Nick
January 10th, 2010 11:57am Report this comment"Dividing lines are his modus, so why doesn't he weave them here?"
Because his biggest dividing line, namely that Conservatives will gleefully cut and cut, whereas Labour will invest, has been blown completely out of the war by Darling.
Brown is now completely bereft of policies and therefore dividing lines.
Polly Gamma
January 10th, 2010 12:08pm Report this commentBrown is gonna play the Sarah Brown card? It always looks to me like he got her off t'internet so I don't see it helping him much!
Verityred
January 10th, 2010 12:17pm Report this commentHowever did we guess Brown was going to deploy a very close member of his family?
Brown seems to need more props than BBC period drama. Woeful.
Adam
January 10th, 2010 12:27pm Report this commentGordon Brown, 'My family aren't props'.
+ Tory thanks also go out to Agent Watt.
emil
January 10th, 2010 12:41pm Report this commentCameron did OK in the short intervals where Marr stopped trying to shout over him.
David
January 10th, 2010 12:43pm Report this commentI despise Labour, GB and his cabinet and cannot forgive them for the damage they have done and I’m almost certain to vote Conservative come the election.
However, after watching some of the Cameron interview this morning I got bored and went off to do other things. So dull, so uninspiring, so cautious. Nothing to get enthusiastic about. How is this supposed to motivate the undecided voter to go out and vote conservative?
I’d really like someone to vote for who isn’t ‘not Labour / GB’
Nicholas
January 10th, 2010 12:48pm Report this comment"Glamorous Sarah will be thrust into the election limelight after Labour chiefs identified her as the PM's greatest asset. She has redrawn her diary so she can be constantly at her husband's side during the hectic four-week run-in to polling day."
Hang on a mo'. If she has redrawn her diary for that "hectic four week run-in to polling day" then Labour must know the date of the election. So why haven't they announced it yet? (Of course we know the answer - but it seems very unfair)
Billericay Dave
January 10th, 2010 12:52pm Report this commentI cant see Cameron attacking until the election is called, wait until there is no going back for gormless then go full force repeating the same things for 3 months wont hit home but weeks before an election there is no time for counter attacks from labour
DavidDP
January 10th, 2010 12:56pm Report this comment"My family are not props"
K atkinson
January 10th, 2010 12:58pm Report this commentPeople feel sorry for Sarah Brown becuse she lives with him: wont belong before they feel more sorry for themselves
Stevie
January 10th, 2010 1:01pm Report this commentIf Mrs Brown has redrawn her diary then they've decided on a date, surely. Spill the beans!
JONNY
January 10th, 2010 1:12pm Report this commentI dunno...
like to see her in a bikini first before I finally decide.
Frank P
January 10th, 2010 1:17pm Report this commentWGAS? Bring on the General Election so that we can do something about it rather than all this incessant speculation.
As for Sarah, if I was a nasty suspicious type I might suspect that she entered into a marriage of convenience to attempt to prove that Gordon was not oriented as Peter Mandelson once suggested (and he should know one would have thought). However, as I'm not the cynical type I will assume that true love struck at a very convenient political moment for Gordon.
One thing does still puzzles me, though, If a Prime Minister who is straight is accused of being bent by someone who is as 'gay' as a Maypole, does it not seem peculiar that the accuser later gets invited to 'serve' in said PM's cabinet - or the other way round, ATCMB?
Forgiveness is indeed wonderful thing, however, and I'm sure we have all misjudged Our Dear Leader. His Christian charity knows no bounds and this bounder Peter Watt's revelations are obviously down to sour grapes. Is Watt's middle name Thomas btw? Wonder why his revelations got so much coverage, when Neather's fell on stony ground hereabouts. Seems much of muchness to me.
JONNY
January 10th, 2010 1:50pm Report this commentHe's not bent Frank P
more like a replicant
penny4m
January 10th, 2010 1:51pm Report this commentFrank P. What does WGAS and ATCMB mean please?
Boudicca
January 10th, 2010 2:15pm Report this commentAs Gordon won't use his family as props, he must only consider blood relatives as his 'family.' Poor Sarah; permitted to be the mother of his children, but not classed as 'family.'
As for Sarah .. glamourous! You must be kidding. Mumsy, yes; but glamourous? How the French must laugh.
JohnOfEnfield
January 10th, 2010 2:19pm Report this commentNO: CCHQ merely have to thank the fact that Cameron isn't an erstwhile un-reconstructed Stalinist Dictator.
I have given up trying to understand what Brown is on about. He is just completely Bonkers.
No debate with him gets to the point - it is either ad-hominum or an attempt at a Marxist Dialectic.
"Investment" as a euphemism for "Spending" indeed: please give us all a break & sod off.
Leila Lacrosse
January 10th, 2010 2:54pm Report this commentDavid will strike a nerve with the immigration issue. I was disappointed to see that the marriage tax credit was just a smoke screen.
http://leilalacrosse.livejournal.com
Chuck Unsworth
January 10th, 2010 3:06pm Report this comment@ JONNY
"I dunno...
like to see her in a bikini first before I finally decide."
You are obviously in need of urgent medical attention. Burka, yes, Bikini no - under no circumstances, ever. Have you seen the rear view? Truly terrifying.
Tankus
January 10th, 2010 3:41pm Report this commenttruckdriver in drag
Holly ......
January 10th, 2010 4:09pm Report this commentAye!
You two!Pack it in!
You know who I'm on about.
No junk in the trunk jokes either.
Verity
January 10th, 2010 4:16pm Report this commentRemember that drab little wedding they had, in the manse with the furniture pushed back against the walls? And around three guests? And he refused to kiss his new wife?
What a nasty piece of work he is. And what a nasty piece of work she must be to marry him. She was a former partner in a lefty pr company with the daughter of that communist whose name I can never spell. Hobsbawm or something.
Alan Douglas
January 10th, 2010 5:19pm Report this comment"She's about as glamorous as a mouldy potato."
That is so unfair. Compared to Gordon she is Bardot in her prime.
Alan Douglas
Fergus Pickering
January 10th, 2010 5:26pm Report this commentCome along, Verity, we all know that you know how to spell Hobsbawm. I think Sarah is to be pitied. She probably thught, as women tend to do, that she could save him or mould him or change him. WShy do so many women marry impossible men? asked Robert Graves. It isn't their fault. It's in their genes. Yours too, Verity, I expect. It's just as well or how would we impossible men ever get hitched? Of course SOME men are beyond the pale, and Gordon is one of those. As to whether he's one of HOSE, it would explain some of his surliness. He ought to be away cavorting with a nineteen-year-old-boy. It's not too late, Gordy, y'know.
Liz Brown
January 10th, 2010 5:49pm Report this commentSarah - the reworked bag of lard? good grief - is that the best gormless can do - won't be too long before he uses his children - not that he "uses his family" Not half he doesn't
Nicholas
January 10th, 2010 6:00pm Report this commentI have it on impeccable authority that Sarah Brown is neither as sweet nor as gentle as some like to believe.
MaisieW
January 10th, 2010 6:08pm Report this commentFrank P Your comment was very good, I have said for sometime I don`t think Gordon and Sarah are close any more, no warmth between them
Just show`s how insecure Gordon is, when he needs his wife to hold his hand
Back to top